From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,bd45e29f9dafca87 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner) Subject: Re: bitwise comparators Date: 2000/01/17 Message-ID: <8607rg$8qa1@news.cis.okstate.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 574039212 References: <3880D375.7E363123@hotmail.com> <38829638.0@news.pacifier.com> <3882FC1C.2BA8C959@hotmail.com> <85vmn2$ki1$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <38836CF2.AB738B8B@hotmail.com> <85vr1s$9qe1@news.cis.okstate.edu> <38838846.2787AD1A@hotmail.com> Organization: Oklahoma State University User-Agent: slrn/0.9.6.2 (Linux) Reply-To: dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-01-17T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: [It would be easier if you kept lines below 75-80 characters. Thanks.] On Mon, 17 Jan 2000 22:23:18 +0100, Alexander Van Hecke wrote: >> >> C has access control? Where? > >the items you put in a struct are default public. >private is a C keyword though. It >is perfectly possible to hide some data items. No, private is not a ISO C89 keyword. My books don't mention it, and gcc (an ISO C compiler) gives a parse error for struct bob {private: int a;}; it gives no error for struct bob {int private;};, which it should if private is a reserved word. I think you've been confused by a bad C/C++ compiler. >but I'd say it's the ability of a language to be _able_ to program >everything you want to, _even if the language was not designed to solve >the problem you're trying to solve_! In this way Prolog is a very >powerful language for AI programs, but it's really poor when it comes to, >let's say, string manipulation. That's a bad definition. Computing theory says the problems you can solve with Bourne shell scripts is exactly equal to the problems you can solve in C or Prolog or Intercal or an assembly language with one instruction (decrement and jump if zero.) >I know with certainty that the first couple of versions of the GNU C++ >compiler, which is by the way a very respected and widespread compiler, >did just that : converting C++ to C and then compiling this code with >the usual gcc compiler. No. cfront (an early C++ compiler by Stroustroup) did that, but the GNU C++ compiler has always been a native compiler. >I rephrase : 'any C++ code can be translated >to C code'. Any C++ code can be translated to Lisp or Ada, too. But you said it could be done easily, which is the contestable point. -- David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org If you wish to strive for peace of soul then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire. -- Friedrich Nietzsche